Some remarks on the Zulu language

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non- commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at http : //books . qooqle . com/|

Mi

THE ZULU LANGUAGE.

T* 0* Editor qf th* Natal WUmtm.

Springvale, March 21. 1870.
fin,— A few months ago. there were tome remark*
in the Natal JPtfestt on the native language spoken
In Natal, which led me to reflect more carefully
than I had previously done on the character of the
Zola language. I redeem the promise then made
to you by sending yoo the following paper, the
result of my thoughts on the subject.

Tours truly.

flamy Callaway.

It ike Zmlm a barbaro m* language 7— It has been
said that the Zulu is a barbarous language. But
what do we understand by barbarous ? The Greek
and Roman appear to have regarded all people as
barbarous that did not speak their language or
follow their customs. When we use the term bar-
barous, in speaking of the Zulu language, do we
mean to assume the attitude of the old Greek
and Roman t If so, then undoubtedly the Zulu
language is barbarous— that is, it is different from
our own, and we do not understand it !

Or perbape, without meaning this, we mean it is

a savage, wild, uncultivated lang uage. Here, again,

if we mean by uncultivated that it has no writtem

Klii ' i ift we , it is a barbarous language. But if by

a a

Digitized by VjOOQIC

■OTftgOt wild, uncultivated, we mean that it has
not passed through any intellectual manipulation,
bot has sprang up in the wild wastee of ignorant,
savage, and uncultivated minds; then whatever
language is barbarous, the Zulu language certainly
is not so, for it possesses a remarkably copious
vocabulary, a very precise grammar, and a very
striking idiomatic structure ; it is neither meagre
in words, nor in the means of expressing with
exactitude thought.

It poue*$ee a remarkably copious vocabulary. — In
the dictionary of Bishop Colenso, there are about
8,000 words. In that or Donne, although the two
dictionaries appear to have been compiled inde-
pendently one of the other, and do not contain
the same collection of words, there are also about
8,000. I gi't at this number by taking an average*
I have noted more than 2,000 words not found in
either of these dictionaries; and in the original
Zulu collected by me, printed and unprinted, there
are probably over 2,000 more which have not yet
been noted. At the lowest computation, then, we
may Bay that 12,000 Zulu words have been com*
m it ted to writing.

But this number does not contain compound
words — the variations of the verbal form — derived
words, Ac. ; neither does it contain the names of
animals, birds, plants ; nor the names of medicines,
of their preparations and mode of administration;
nor of diseases. In other words, the dictionaries
hitherto published contain for the most part only
common words, and not scientific words, for it is
not incorrect to speak of a scientific Zulu nomen*
elature.

At the lowest computation, the Zulu language
contains over 20,000 words. And be it remarked,
that this copiousness is not like that which Bishop
Walton ascribed to the " Alcoran ish Arabic," which
be says contains " five hundred names for a lion,
two hundred for a serpent, eighty for honey, and
above a thousand for a sword," for the Zulu lan-
guage does not abound in synonyms. But it
contains upwards of 20,000 words in band fide use
among the people. Those curious appellatives ft*

different colored cattle, or for different make co\d<
to express certain minute peculiarities of color or
arrangement of color, which it is difficult for us to
grasp, are not synonyms, but instances in which
a<new noon or name is used instead of adding
adjectives to one name to express the various con*
ditions of an object. Neither are those various
verbs, used to express varieties of the same action,
synonyms, such as, nhupata, to carry in the band ;
uk*rt*hata, to carry on the shoulder; ukubekta, to
Carry on the back.

Let us remember that Shakspeare does not con-
tain anything like this number of words, neither
probably does Milton or Byron. Of course we
■hall not find many natives who are acquainted
with even the majority of this large number of
words, much lees who use them in common conver-
sation. But the common native does use a very
large number of words in conversation. The
English peasant's stock is supposed* to be about
800. Very few native grown-up men would use so
•mall a number. And I am quite inclined to
believe that an ordinary native speaks better, has
a greater command of words, and knows much
more of things which surround him, of the history
of his people as a whole, and of his own family in
particular, than any common peasant of England,
Scotland, or Ireland.

But, with all this copiousness, is it not, at the
same time, a very defective language even in words?
For instance, the writer of the article which has
given rise to these remarks says t— " Ton can
scarcely expect much improvement in a people
who has not yet settled a word for the Almighty."

Here are two thoughts : 1. The unim provability
of the nathes; 2. The want of a term for the
Almighty in their language.

An & priori conclusion on such a ground as to
the impossibility of improvement in the people
among whom we are living, and on whom so much
of our own future depends, is a very serious con-
clusion indeed, and cannot fail, if it become a
practical principle with us, most effectually to tie
ear hands, and prevent us from making exertions

!fi

Digitized by VjOOQIC

to Improve then i Mid, further, if cor t
be fuse, make qb the perpetrator* of a great
wrong. On the whole, perhaps, they art not im-
provimgi perhaps, in some respects, through being
brought into contact with the white colonist, they
are degenerating, or, as some one has said, pro-
ducing a •• hybrid— (between savage and civilised)
—to be avoided." But the fault of this is not in
Che native, at least not more than in the white
colonists, who, being thrown among a people of
very different character and puisnits from their
own,— of lees trained and feebler intellect,— of
few wants,— with no knowledge of the luxuries or
the cares of civilised life, and no taste for the
mode of life they see exhibited by their white
neighbors, except in its coarsest materialism,—
therefore regard them as wholly and utterly wrong*
and, in many instances, feel for them a groundless
aversion, or an equally groundless fear. But
this is apart from the subject we have in hand ; I
shall therefore conclude by saying, there are
tempers and dispositions and conduct, which many
white men may do well to copy from these despised
savages.

The want of a word for the Almighty does not,
t presume, mean that there is an absence of the
religious feeling. If it does, it is a mistake.
There is not, it is true, in the native language,
any word that we can select to eipreas the
developed idea of God, as we now understand it*
But how has that word among ourselves attained
to that deep meaning which wc give it, and which
is as familiar to us as any word used in the
common affairs of everyday life P Not- all at once :
and we do not even know what our forefathers
meant by the word ; all we suppose ie, that they
meant by it something very imperfect, and that
as used by them it was wholly inadequate to
express the idea of God such as we have it. The
native language is without a word capable of
expressing our idea of God, because there is no
great evidence that they have ever given them-
selves np to religious speculations, and therefore
saligion among them is still rudimentary. But tbej

hews a iWigiceM and, m a pert of 1
aa idea of creation aad a creator, and a word for
creator.— &****» or Umdati. Wholly iaadequate
1Mb words, I am quite ready to admit, are to
eiprees God ; but there they are, an evidence of
the existence of the religions instinct,— nnisap*
pUcd,— misdeveloped; but still there. Then they
hare their M lesser gods."— the spirits of their
deceased ancestors ; they hare their oonsolenc*,
their sense of right and wtoae? ; their laws and
customs to regnlate life. Kot less improbable or
impossible is the improvement of such a people,
than that of the heathen of old with their oorrupt
mythology,— their deified adulterers and harlots.

The idea of divinity is among the people,
although, as yet, they hare not expressed that
idea in any fulness by a word. Their religion is
Tory simple, and the terms they use are quite
sufficient for their felt religious needs. The
religious terms we use are, 1 doubt not, in an
immense number of instances, neoat our felt
religious needs,— a mere transcendentalism to
many. And how many among ourselves, if they
were subjected to a like scrutiny, with a similar
spirit of criticism to that which we generally
bring to the investigation of native character and
knowledge, would be found, with the great words
of our holy religion in their mouths, to have no
more, it may be even less, religion than exists
among the heathen whom we so much despise.

The existence of the religious instincts in the
natives,— of those germs of religious truth, which
among* Christian people with a divine revelation
have been developed into so glorious a religion,—
is evident from the readiness with which under
proper teaching they accept the fact of the Creating
Power continued to be manifested in Providence}
and that that Creating Power is our Father in
Heaven.

But, say some, their want of words and of the
ideas which words represent, is manifested in other
matters. They have no word to express gratitude
or thanks. This again is a mistake, arising? from
incapacity en our parts to enter into the spuit of

Digitized by VjOOQLC

a sssgpegtj to dSfltoont from our own, and onr-is>
ability to interpret the actions of the natives.

They do not thsnk as we do. Bat they have
their own mode of thanking. Tbey do noteipress
gratitude as we do, bat they are grateful. The
very mode in which they accept a gift-— extending
both hands though the gift is not capable of filling
one, and which some have regarded as an intima-
tion of greediness— is meant by them to express a
humble and grateful appreciation of the favor they
are receiving. When they receive a gift tbey say
" Yes, yes ! " or "My chief," or " My dear friend,"
ail such expressions being their mode of acknow-
ledgment and of satisfaction. Or they say*
" ffgi y* honga" I give praise, equivalent to our
" 1 thank you." Or what is still more striking,
without addressing the giver at all, they turn to
those standing round, and ask them to give thanks
in their stead, "Ngi bongele-nifbaniu /'Return thanks
for me, O people. Or, without being asked, those
around will give thanks for the present bestowed
on another. There is quite as much reality, quite
as muoh meaning and sincerity in their mode of -
thanking as in our own.

Another mode of thanking is curious, as it brings
the natives into relation with the Irish. The
Irish on receiving a gift will say, "May your
honour never get tired."— The natives say, •• Do
not get tired, sir," or they may say, " Na ngomeo
fkti,nko$i" And to-morrow too, sir. The natives
mean by this mode of expression to exalt the givers
to say that his heart and will and power are equal ;
that he is good and willing and able to give, and
as he is to-day, so he will ever remain.

Bat suppose that there existed no word for
gratitude or thanks in the language, could that,
be any proof that the native is an ungrateful or
an unthankful man ? The French have no word
for comfort ; the English no word for ennui. Are
the French therefore strangers to comfort, and we
to ennui ? The human mind is ever struggling to
find a verbal expression for its inner consciousness*
Many words are used and rejected again ; because
of their inadequacy to express the inner sense of

the general mind. The general mind does not

accept them bat for a time ; at length the right
word comes and meets with universal acceptance j
and the language of all people is the result of a
kind of " natural selection," by which is appropri-
ated whatever man feels to really express hit
thoughts. ThoughtB precede words. The native
may be grateful, even though he had no word to
express gratitude.

It has been said again that the natives hare
no word to express reasoning or the reasoning
process. This again is a mistake. And even if
the word were not in the language, who that has
any knowledge of the native could doubt for a
moment that he is a reasoning animal just as
much as we are? But they have a method of
expressing the reasoning process, — a metaphor
taken from physical nature to represent the men-
tal process, just as other people speak of spiritual
things by means of unspiritual words used figura-
tively. There is a plant named Umlunge; when
dug up it is found to have a succession of tubers,
following each other in a line and intimately con-
nected. And so they take this plant as an illus-
tration of the reasoning process; each tuber or
isigakca is an argument, — the ohain of argument
is umlunge, the connected tubers; to build up
argument in to a chain of reasoning is ukwelakanyisaj
and umuntu o nomlunge is a man who reasons
orderly, and builds up his arguments one on
another.

Some may think this a strained and far-fetched
metaphor. But it is exactly of the same character
as our chain of reasoning. At any rate it shows
a keen analysis and appreciation of the reasoning
process. Of course they have no words to express
the technicalities of theology, or of science. But
the capacity of the language is indefinite, and the
power of constructing new words to meet new
needs unlimited. But whence did we get our
technical terminology? It is not Saxon. It is
Greek or Roman.

The Zulu language possesses a very exact gramme*.
So much is this the case, that it has bean said
a 8

Digitized by VjOOQIC

that* native never spea^iingrammatioaUy. This,
of coarse, is a mistake ; there are careless and
ignorant speakers among the Zulus, as well as
among other people. But the principles of its

Eminar are very exact, and the structure of the.
gaage is not that of a barbarous people. No
one that has studied it can suppose that it is.

We cannot allude to many examples here, and
that but briefly.

The different words of a sentence are brought
into mutual, unmistakable connection. The.
principle on which this depends has been called
" euphonio concord." There may be some objection
to the term ; but it shows how much impressed
the early scholars, who attempted to lay down the
roles of the grammar, were with the harmonious
combination of the language. The principle is
this. The noun projects, if I may so speak, a
portion of itself— that is, of its prefix, upon every
other word in the sentence that is related to it j
for example: — TTmntwana «-ami o-(=a«) muhle
o»(=a u) tandekayo u file. My beautiful, beloved
child has become ill.

Here we have «, a portion of the prefix urn, ap-
pearing four times, — in u-AmifwamiJ the possessive
ease, — in the relative o in omuhU and otandekayo ;
and before the verb.

Every subject of a verb, whether noun or pro-
noun, is brought, as mmntwanain the above sentence,
into direct relation with the verb, by what may
properly be called its characteristic pronoun. The
so-called emphatic forms of the pronouns, and the
several classes of nouns, have each its characteristic
pronoun ; and however involved a sentence may
be, and however muoh the latter part may be
separated from the former, the characteristic
pronoun, always standing as the immediate subject
of the verb, at once takes the mind back to the
remote or real subject.

We may also point out the force of the nominal
prefixes. There are the roots of nouns, which have
now no known meaning to us, but whatever
meaning they originally had, that meaning is
specialised fey the prefix ; {or example :—

sou • ntu — mm • hood,
ia - ntu—man • kind.

Where it will be observed that the prefix •&*> cor-
responds with our suffix -hood, and at- with -kind.
The verb, by a very slight change, is made to
express what we require more or less circumlocu-
tion to effect. For example:

Ukutand • a— to lore.'

Ukutand - eta— to lore for.

Ukutand - uo— to cause to love, to pleas*

Ukutand - inw-to lore earnestly.

Ukutand - ana - to love mutually.

Ukutand - eka-to be lorable.

Uku - d • tanda— to lore anfi-»l£

Uku - si - tand - sb— to lore selfishfe.

Uku - » - tand - «o— to please oneself, to pretend to lore.

Let us also notice the precision of the following
examples* and see by how slight a change perfect
>lefiniteness is ensured :

Pftnytf* mmM.— He bae come back from the Tillage.

V bttfU *m*i*L— He baa come back to the Tillage.

Wapcnduka Jhyw.~- He turned away from him.

Wapendukela huge.— He turned to him.

JTfibambeU 4ha*i Zonri.-Catch my horse for me (without
help from me).

Ngi bambUe ikuM lami.— Help me to catch my hone (I co-
operating with yon).

We may also note that the change of the final
a into isisa, by which an intensification of the
meaning of the verbal root is effected, is used also
in nouns to give them a superlative meaning.

ladbaa, aman. In dodbi ta, an out-and-out man, a man in a

superlative degree,
iaeispa, a rascal. /ss^sMm, a rascal in a luperle&ve degree

One example more—

Unapt ongamgitita na f— Who is able to help meP Implying

that someone can.
Opiongangimeanat— Who is able to help meP Implying

that no one can, the question being put in utter hope-

The mutual dependence of the words of a sen-
tence, the form of the verbs, the power of ex-
pressing shades of time which we are unable to
do, the general regularity of the structure of the
language, founded on fixed principles, many of

Digitized by VjOOQIC

which we hare yet to discover; and the general
precision and exactness of the language,— ail, it
seeins to me, show that the Zulu is a highly elabo-
rated language ; much more so than the Hebrew,
which, in some respects, it resembles ; and that
though now used by a barbarous people, it is not a
language which sprung up in a barbarous state of
society. It is the language of a pastoral and
agricultural people ; of a people thinking gravely
and cleverly within a certain circle of thought ; of
a people ainongst whom exist rights of property
and of citizenship in a certain sense ; a people too
among whom, apparently, peaceful pursuits were
more acceptable than warfare ; an intensely super-
stitious people, who, being unable to explain the
phenomena of nature, referred them to spiritual
agencies, which however, they attempted to con-
trol, and believed themselves capable of control-
ling, by incantations and medicines.

There are two sides of the question between
white and black. Again we ask, what do we mean
by barbarism ? Something different from our own,
whioh our intense self-assertion prevents us from
considering or appreciating ? The natives, acting
on a similar principle, consider our language bar-
barous, because it is different from theirs and un-
intelligible to them.

The old Roman thought our Teutonic ancestors
barbarous and their language barbarous. And we
have foolishly accepted the Roman version of the
character and language of our forefathers. But
depend upon it, our forefathers had as great a
contempt for Roman manners and language as the
Romans had for Gothic manners and language.
Hear what one of them says :—

" When we would brand an enemy with dis-
grace, we call him Roman, comprehending under
this one name, Roman, all that is base, cowardly,
false, and vicious." (Quoted from Finkerton in
" Atnerikan Filolojikal Magasin.")

There were two sides between Roman and Goth
then ; depend upon it there are two sides of the
question between European and Zulu now !

The Red Indians who visited England some

u

▼ears ago had a very similar opinion of the Eng-
lish, as the old Goth had of the Roman, that is,
of the mass of the English they had become ac-
quainted with in their native country. To them
the English was a mean, base, wicked, selfish,
covetous abomination ; whose general evil charac-
ter was not relieved by his evidently great intel-
lectual ability, because he used his intellect and
power to gain, and to gain at any cost of suffering
and distress to others. So strongly was the Red
Indian impressed with this belief, that he could
not conceive that Heaven could be a desirable
place for him if the white man were to be his
companion there. One of his ideas of heavenly
rest was separation— eternal and complete — from
the white tyrant, whom he felt to bo a curse to
him here.

And the native of Natal is rapidly forming a
' similar opinion of the white man. Have we given
him no reason for forming such an opinion P

As regards the language, he thinks the white
man "jabbers." He does not think he talks. The
English language is a barbarous language to him,
little better than the twitter of bird*. This is an
excusable mistake in the native; he is ignorant,
and unacquainted with the various forms of human
speech. But it is inexcusable in any educated
Englishman to suppose that the native jabbers,
because he has not yet trained his own ear to dis-
tinguish between the inarticulate sounds of
animals, and the articulate human speech as spoken
by tbe natives.

But it is not the difficulty of distinguishing in-
articulate from ar'iculate speech, that causes, and
in a oertain sense justifies, the doubt of the native
sb to our capacity to speak at all. He very rarely
indeed hears a white man speak any thing like the
native language, and when he does, he is quite
surprised, and exclaims admiringly — " He speaks !"
But instead of the native tongue he hears a
miserable jargon, and he must be a very clever and
ingenious man to interpret this jargon into a lan-
guage he can understand. Let us give a few
nples in illustration :—

Digitized by VjOOQIC

12

Mina win kick

Mina will toss a backet of manri on

Fana, hamba, mina funa manzi.

If ina fona wena hamba lata komo.

Hina aiyazi.

Wena azi haahi kamma.

This is the kind of barbarous stuff the native
generally hears the white man speak. No wonder
he despises onr power of speech and condescends
to oar supposed weakness by talking each a jargon
in reply. Bat it is not Zulu, not the least in
structure, and often not even in words.

The Zulu language is not meagre in the mean* of
expressing with exactitude and without ambiguity
thought. — As to the ambiguity of thought and
meagreness of expression with which the Zulu
language has been charged, it is ambiguous and
meagre only to those who do not understand it.
There is no thought on any subject that cannot be
expressed in the Zulu language; give it the
technical words required, and it is equal to any
thing.

Ovid took the pains to write a little book in
Gothic, and when he looked back upon his work,
he felt rather ashamed that he had done such a
thing.

Ah, pudet me Getico scripsi serin one libeHum.

It would be very interesting now to see the libellum
of which Ovid was ashamed. One would like to
know whether it was Gothic really, or only Roman-
Gothic, like our English-Zulu, of which any man
might well be ashamed.

Ovid did not know what hidden power was in the
despised Gothic. He could not foresee that greater
poets than he would use it as a vehicle of expres-
sion, and by so using it glorify it for ever, and give
it immortality ; whilst his own language of which
he was not ashamed, but might have been, would
become a dead unspoken language, no longer used
as a vehicle of thought. He could not read a
Sbakspeare, a Milton or a Byron, a Goethe or a
Schiller; could not imagine that in process of time
the Gothic would probably become the language
of the world, — the universal "kosmoglot" — the

IS

language which should bind men everywhere into
a common brotherhood by the use of a common
language.

This was hidden from Ovid. But it has come to
pass. Things hidden from us may come to pass too.
And the language which is despised as barbarous,
contains in it secrets which it would be worth the
world's while to know. Not that we ever expect
to meet with a Zulu Shakspeare or Milton, even
though a native has been designated the Zulu
Demosthenes and Plato in one ! and that by a Zulu
scholar, who knows well how to appreciate power
of expression and of reasoning.

But what I wish, in making these remarks, is
that we should not contemn a language of which
we are ignorant, and of which as yet the merest
echo— scarcely that— has ever reached us.

The clicks not necessarily any detriment to the lan-
guage as an instrument of thought. — It has been asked,
" When can you ever expect to see a really civilised
man with three Bushmen clicks in his tongue."
The clicks are a very disagreeable phonetio element,
no doubt, especially to those who cannot pronounce
them. But what & priori reason is there why clicks
and civilization should be antagonistic P The
German with its harsh gutturals, as difficult to
many to pronounce as the Zulu clicks, was once
said to be a language only proper to be addressed
to horses. But what has the German language
done, as an instrument of thought, for the German
mind, and indeed for the world's mind ? What is
German now ? The language in which the most
profound thought and deepest reasoning find ex-
pression. — No, it is not any peculiar phonetio
element in a language, whether it be a Northern
guttural, or a Western nasalization, or a South
African click, which are all mere external modes,
that can interfere with a language being used as
an instrument of thought; whether it shall be
used as an instrument of thought, depends on the
mind and on deeper principles affecting the struc-
ture of the language, and not on any mere phonetio
element which often depends on physical causes.
over which the mind has no control.

Digitized by VjOOQIC

14

And here let me remark that it appears to me,
and it will probably be admitted by most, that
there is a certain correspondence between the mind
and the language it usee as an instrument of
thought. It has been said, that of all modifying
circumstances which affect men and determine
their growth and development, " none has greater
importance than the means of expressing and trans-
mitting intellectual action. The spoken end the
written language of a nation reveal to ub its pre-
vailing, and to a certain extent, its unavoidable
mode of thought n (Brinton). But it is the lan-
guage that is plastic, Lot the mind. As it is the
soft parts of the mollusk that determine the shape
of its shell, and not the shell that determines the
form of the soft parts ; so it is the language which
forms itself or rather is formed about the mind,
and not the mind that is formed about the lan-
guage. And as the growing mollusk casts off the
shell which was quite suited to it at a certain
period, and renews another in accordance with its
expansion, so will the growing mind of an indivi-
dual or of a people form for itself a language in
accordance with its requirements. Hence it is
probable that there is a different action of different
minds,-— a different method by which their pro-
cesses are conducted which requires for their com-
pleteness a different instrument. The German
mind works differently from the Italian; and a
thoroughly German mind would have a difficulty
in thinking in the Italian language. He may
know Italian words and even grammatical rules ;
but the use of a language does not depend on
words and rules only. He must learn the Italian
process of mental action before he can thoroughly
enioy Italian literature ; much more before using
the Italian language as an instrument of thought.
Substitute Italian words for German without any
reference to idiomatic arrangement and structure,
and you would not have Italian. Nor by substi-
tuting German words for Italian in the same way
would you have German. Neither if you merely
change Zulu words for English, or English for
Zulu, would any one be able to understand either

16

language so changed. Before folly understanding
a language foreign to us, before we can use it ai
an instrument of thought, we must learn not only
the peculiarity of its words and idioms, but also
the mental action of those who speak it. At first
we translate into our own language with difficulty,
and it is some time before we can read understand-
ing^ without translating ; and still longer before
we can speak without first thinking with our own
language, and translating as we speak. We must
think in the order of the Kafir mind before we
shall be able thoroughly to understand the Kafir
language. And in learning English the natives
will not be able to use English as an instrument
of thought, till they understand, 1 mean practically,
the mode of action of the English mind whilst
thinking. They may soon be able to use the Ian*
guage in a broken, imperfect way, sufficient for
common things ; but it will take a long time before
they will be able to use it as an instrument of
thought. Natives who can talk English fairly for
common things, as soon as they begin to speak of
matters of importance or in which they are deeply
interested, will at once drop the new for their own
language. It is supposed to take ten years for an
intelligent, educated European to master the Eng*
lish language. Shall we defer indefinitely the
education of the Zulu till they have been trained
so as to understand it ?

Would it he wise to attempt to suppress the Zulm
language artificially ? — From what has been already
said, it will be evident that I do not think it would
be either wise or proper to attempt to suppress the
Zulu language, neither would the attempt be sue*
eessf ul. A language will be used by a people just
as long as it is necessary or useful. As long as it
is necessary, no laws attempting to stamp it out
will get rid of it. When it ceases to be necessary,
it will die, and no means that we can employ will
retain its vitality as a spoken language. There is
a free trade in speech. It has its laws of origin,
progress, development, decline and death, which
are as little under our control as atmospheric
changes.

b 2

Digitized by VjOOQIC

16

There are two grounds on which the Zulu lan-
guage cannot be done without, probably, for many,
generations.

First, the native, if he has to be taught anything
beyond the merest, commonest things of daily life,
must be taught it by educated Englishmen speak*
ing the native language. This knowledge of the
language is necessary to enable the teacher to
teach the native to read in English. And this is
the only way they will have any chance of learning
either the deeper principles of religion or of tho*e
new social duties which have arisen in consequence
of their contact with white men. The Roman
Catholic, generally wiser than we are in such
matters, has, I hear, ordained priests from among
the Irish peasantry, that they might the more
successfully teach their countrymen than could be
done by the more educated men who are unable
to speak the native language of Ireland. Wales
is all but lost to the English Church, because to
a great extent the clergy there speak only English,
and cannot teach the Welsh in their own language.
This may be a lesson to us.

The second reason why we cannot do without
the Zulu language is that for many years to come
the masses of the native population will not be
brought into any close contact with Europeans.
Both in Natal and outside Natal there is a teem*
ing multitude that cannot be communicated with,
in any other way, for any purpose either social or
religious, but by their own language. For all
purposes of religious, moral, intellectual, and civil
improvement of the natives, their own language
must be the vehicle of communication with them.
A few only in our large towns, or who are in ser-
vice with white men, will pick up a few words of
English ; some among them may possibly learn to
speak fluently on common matters; some few may
sufficiently master the language to uso it as an
instrument of thought, but they will be very few
indeed ; and the man who wishes and who will be
able most effectually to influence the natives of
Natal, must master thoir language. And the colo-
nists generally will find that the surest way o£

17

securing' the services of natives, and of making
them intelligent labourers, is to communicate with
them in their own tongue.

As a matter of necessity, therefore, the Zulu
language must be retained. As a matter of expe-
diency the white man would do well to learn it.
But not only so, but I believe that any attempt to
stamp it out would prove unsuccessful.

•» Emperors have attempted to change the dia-
lects of conquered nationalities, but without sue*
cess. Such a consummation must come, if it coma
at all, by the operation of steady, slow-working
causes more potent than the will of monarchs."

The barbarian chief Tsbaka wished to reduce
the various dialects of the tribes to a common
language. With him the Zulu was the standard
language, and the other dialects were not allowed
to be spoken in the presence of the mighty tyrant.
But what was effected by his will ? Why that he
made the law, and the people followed custom,
and to this day the Zulu and other dialects exist
together. The only way to amalgamate t hem into
a common language is to establish a native litera-
ture, and teach the natives to read.

Let us turn our eyes towards Europe, and we
may learn many a lesson on this subject.

The Greeks still speak Greek, notwithstanding
the many years they have been down-trodden by
their Mussulmen conquerors.

The Magyars, an Asiatic people, still speak their
native language ; more or less corrupted, doubtless,
but now being again cultivated, and becoming more
and more the instrument of national thought and
the means of national life. When the Hungarians
were converted to Christianity, their teachers in*
troduced Latin, not only into sole use in public
worship, but got it adopted as the languago of
the court and of the Government. But still the
lower orders spoke their own tongue, and conversed
with their native nobility in it. But Latin was,
for the most part, the literary language of the
country till the end of the last century. But
when Joseph II. endeavored to suppress the Magyar
language by decreeing the use of German in the

Digitized by VjOOQIC

18

schools, courts of justice, and administration, the
Hungarian patriots regarded it as a sign that it
was intended to destroy their nationality and civil
rights, and at once they devoted themselves to the
regeneration of their native tongue; and, in 1806,
the Magyar was formally substituted for the Latin
in law and other public documents. (Anthropological
Review, 1866.J

Tae Latiu displaced the primitive languages of
many countries in Europe, not by giving them
Latin in return, but new languages built upon a
Latin basis, Italian, French, Spanish, Ac But the
original languages still linger in many places;
Busque in Spain and some parts of France ;
Kytnric or Gaelic, dialects of a common language,
in some parts of France ; whilst in the South and
in Switzerland there is a patois spoken, which is
probably some Kyairic dialect more or leas cor-
rupted.

How the Saxon language displaced the old
British we know, was rather by forcing back those
who spoke the Keltic into Cornwall, Wales, and
the Scottish highlands, than by forcing the British
to adopt the language of the conquerors. And in
those places in England, Scotland, and Ireland,
where the original Keltic population settled down,
either entirely unmixed with Teutonic blood, or
greatly preponderating over the foreign element,
the original language is still spoken by the com-
mon people ; gone, it may be, entirely in Cornwall,
rapidly ceasing in Scotland ; still spoken exten-
sively in Ireland ; the language of the common
people in Wales. And now the language is dying,
learned men and scholars are beginning to gather
up the fragments, and to glean from them the
history of the past, and mourning that they did
not begin before.

It is remarkable that the Normans in France
adopted the language of the conquered people.
But when they became the conquerors of England,
although they succeeded in corrupting, they could
not succeed in displacing the English language
by the Norman French.

It is not easy to annihilate languages. The

1*

only sure way of doing it is by annihilating those
who speak them. No people numerically much
smaller has ever caused a conquered people to
adopt its language. It would be interesting to
traoi out the causes which determine the perpetu-
ation or the extinction of languages ; but I have
already trespassed too much on your time. I will
therefore only add, that in addition to the principle
that the conquerors if numerically small, cannot
force their language on the conquered, it is prob-
able, that if the conquerors settle in the new
country without women of their own nation, the
language of the country will continue to be spoken ;
but that if they settle in large numbers with their
women, the language of the conqueror will ulti-
mately prevail.

In conclusion, I am not doing anything with the
intention of " elevating barbarous idioms." I am
doing nothing with the view even of perpetuating
the Zulu language. Such a thought of either
elevating or perpetuating has never entered my
mind; never fount d any part of the plan of the
work I have laid down ior myself. All lam doing,
consciously and to the best of my ability, is to
teach the men I find around me, those of my own
generation. Which I can only do effectually by as
effectually as possible mastering their language,
and giving them works to read in their own tongue.

By the side of this, another object has steadily
become developed, that of saving from oblivion
the popular traditions, religious legends and faiths,
the superstitions and thoughts of a people, who, if
not destined to pass away as so many other colored
races have passed away before the advancing tide
of civilization, will gladly hereafter compare
themselves in their advancement with what they
now are, and if destined to be lost to the world as
a distinct nationality, then the work in which I
am engaged will afford to others a monument of
their existence and character, and those who fol-
low, when they begin to enquire what were the
people of whom they hear in the dull echoes of
history, will not be left to glean information here
and there among a few decrepit old people, but will

Digitized by VjOOQIC

20

have ready to hand a mass of materials, which will
yield the truth to their enquiries.

What we miss through the neglect of our fore-
fathers may teach us to begin at once to collect
what can be collected of Zulu legends, &c, as
forming an interesting and not unimportant part
in the history of our common humanity, and not to
leave our children to mourn, as our ancestors have
left us, that the people have died away, and the
language become confined to a few mountain fast-
nesses, or a few old men and women, before we
have gathered up what might be known of their
past, as it is fossilized in the language of genera-
tions, or detailed in the real facts of history, or in
myths or fanoiful legends. For myself, I could
heartily wish that others would help me in this
work, so useful and interesting in a scientific point
of view, and would try, wherever they can, to
gather up at least a few of the tales and legends
which are rapidly passing from the memory of the
people. I shall roost thankfully co-operate with
any such, and any information of any kind,
whether in Zulu, written at the dictation of natives,
or recollected and recorded in English, will be most
acceptable, and would, no doubt, however appa-
rently defective and fragmentary, often prove a
clue to important results, and help me to fill op
gaps, which must otherwise remain vacant.

21

2b the Editor of the Natal Witnen.

Sib, —Will you be kind enough to give me space
in your journal for the following remarks on the
proper word* of prayer in Zulu. — Tours, &&,

H. Callaway.

It is now some years ago that, at the suggestion
of an intelligent, thoughtful native, I adopted a
different formula for prayer from that in common
use. Many have <isked me since* my reason for
adopting that form, viz., the optative instead of
the imperative mood. Some have been satisfied
with my reasons ; others are still violently opposed
to it, and make various and contradictory assertions
as to the meaning of the form I employ.

I assume that if the form were so very wrong as
some assert, indeed if it were wrong at all, a native
could not have suggested it to me. If I had adop-
ted it from some grammatical fancy of my own,
he might allow it to pass without objection ; but
he could not of his own accord have objected to a
form in use, and suggested a new one without
reason. It cannot be what some assert it to be,—
a kind of authoritative claim for help ; or a dicta-
tion to God. Had this been its meaning, no devout
native could have suggested it ; neither would it
have been tolerated by the many others who have
at once adopted it with approbation.

On the other hand, if right, whence has sprung
the objections made by white men to its use ?

This is the question I have set myself to resolve;
and I shall, perhaps, most effectually give the
results of my investigations by discussing the
principles which appear to guide the native in
asking, in petitioning, or in prayer.

In the first place be it remarked the imperative
mood in Zulu is strongly imperative in its significa-
tion ; that is, it is used to command, or implies a

Digitized by VjOOQIC

right to demand or to expect that what is asked
shall be done.

It is used in asking of familiars, relations, inti-
mate friends, children, or inferiors. It is used also
to demand the restitution of what belongs to the
asker. It may also be used in pressing emergencies.

Ngi pe loko — Give me that.

Ngi pe 60— Give me that, I say.

Si pe ukudhla — Give us food.

N'Jca — Hand over.

Leta— Bring it ! will yon ?

Ngipepela — Give me then.
These and such forms are imperative, and can only
rightly be addressed to familiars, relations, in-
feriors ; or when we are asking for what belongs
to us, or to have done what we have a right to
demand shall be done.

The mode in which the natives pray to the
Amatongo deserves our consideration. When they
want any thing, it is enough for them simply to
call on the Amatongo, without mentioning speci-
fically what they want.

jBaA-KnVt— People of our house,
is a prayer. It is enough. They take it for granted
that the Amatongo know what they want without
being told.

Or. as when they sneeze, which they regard as a
moment of especial good luck when they are brought
into some closer relation to the Amatongo, and
therefore regard it as the time of acceptable
prayer, they simply mention the thing they wish
to have. For example :

Inkomo — A cow.
Abantwana — Children.
Or they may use the following forms :
Bakwiti! Izinkomo!— People of our house! Cattle!
Bakwiti ! Inhlanhla nokupila ! — People of our

house ! Good luck and health 1
Bakwiti ! Abantwana ! — People of our house E

Children !
Bakwiti! Ngi zale abantwana / — People of oar
house ! That I may beget children !

Makwiti / HTgi pe>*i inzalo, ngi gale ! — People of
our peopie ! Give me offspring, that I may
beget children !

In this last example we hare the imperative,
ngi pe-ni, because, as the native who used it said,
"• the Amatongo are our people and friends, and
we are not afraid of them."

Of this mode of asking by the imperative mood,
various natives have expressed themselves dif-
ferently, all in terms of reprobation, if it be used
to ask anything of a person worthy of respect.

One says, If I say — ngi pe— Give me— 1 am not

afraid.
Another, If I say — ngi pe—I have no respect
Another, If I say — ngipe — I despise.
Another, If I say — ngipe — I demand what be-

belongs to me.

Another, If a man says to me, ngi pe, he snatches.

And so far as I can gather from natives this
form is wholly unsuitable in prayer, or in asking
to have anything given to us, or in asking any-
thing of a superior. And this appears to be the
opinion of some of those who object to the Opta-
tive Mood employed by myself.

The practical question therefore is, if we ought
not to use the Imperative Mood in prayer, what is
the proper form to be used in praying ?

Another mode of praying which has been sug-
gested as a substitute is the optative mood in a
full form; as, U nga ngi pa ukuii, You may give
me such-and-such. But this is a familiar, dis
respectful, unearned mode of asking; may be
uBed in fun; or, may intimate fconuthing worse
than disrespect.

If a girl used this form in addressing a man it
would be supposed to imply that there had been
some previous improper familiarity ; that she was
his itikxebi or sweetheart ; or that she wished to
be. And if a girl thus addressed a man in the
presence of others, and he wished to put himself
right with them, he would ask what she meant by
it ; and say,-*-" AJbaniu ha ya kuti uina?" What

Digitized by VjOOQIC

Mi

wiU the people say if they hear you address m* i§
this manner ?

I point this oat, because it has been suggested
as a proper form of prayer, and brought forward,
because a man has heard himself thus addressed,
when had he fully understood the delicacy of the
native language he would jave known that it was
an improper familiarity to address him thus.

The same or similar objection lies to the con-
tracted forms : — Ng' u ngi pa or ngo ngi pa.

The form I have adopted is : — Nga u ngi pa.

But this must be used in a proper connection
and with a proper intonation. It may be so used
and so pronounced as to be rude and disrespectful.
Bnt if used properly it is earnest and reverential.

For example if I say to a man simply, — Nga %
ngipaihashi, it is authoritative. It means, you
ought to, or mast give me a horse. It is abrupt,
and would not be used by a native in addressing
a petition to a superior. Neither would it be
proper to say, — Nga u ngi pa ukuli, Nkosi. This
would be abrupt, — " snatching ;*' it would mean,
you ought to, or must, or might give me, Sir.

And even if you were to ask a native whether it
would be proper to go to a chief and begin with'
Nkosi, — Nkosi, nga u ngi pa ulcuti, he would at
once say, " By no means. It is very improper to
ask a chief in that way." Bees use they never do
ask anything of a chief thus. It would be abrupt
(uhtnqumaj and wholly unusual and improper.

I make these remarks that others may under-
stand that I am fully aware that this mode can be
used improperly. But the same natives who have
objected in the strongest possible way to the form
when used as just given, have assented just as
strongly to its propriety and reverence when used
as it is in my translation of the Prayer Book.

Before proceeding to point out the rules which
should regulate us in using this form, let us say
a few words on their mode of asking anything of
chiefs or great men.

,The natives use the greatest servility. Theyrarely
mention the thingthey want; but proceed by around-
about-way to speak of their sufferings, their mis-

fortunes, their want* and in this way make the
chief understand what thoy are asking for. And
t^e principle which is at the bottom of this mode
qf petitioning is really a very beautiful one. It
is this, — it is only necessary to tell (bika) my
chief tbat I am Buffering. He will know what to
4o to relieve me. To ask in any other way they
regard as improper, and speak of it by several
terms of reprobation. They say it is " snatching "
(ukupangaj from the chief ; or, it is telling him to
" fetch " ; or, it is " sending " him ; or, it is
" taking away " what is his; or, it is " fighting "
with him.

For instance, a man wants something of his
chief ; as he approaches him, he would say some-
thing of this kind : —

Eh! NkoH! Bab*! Silo! Eh! Chief! Father!
Leopard!
This is ukuhuUka. Eh! alone is vkuknleia, and
an expression of respect. Having thus made
obeisance, he is silent, merely squatting at a short
distance from the chief. If the chief says nothing ;
or asks him what he wants, he will proceed some-
thing in this way :—

Nkoti enkulu ! ngi f lcnyo ; ngi & 'bulculeJca ! 8i
lambiU! Abantwana a ba $a dhli Hubisi. Great
chief ! I come to him ; I come to make obeisance.
We are hungry. The children have no longer any
milk to eat.

The chief knows that he is asking for a cow.

It will be noticed that, in this sentence, the
native speaks to the chief in the third person ;
and, in addressing a chief, this is the proper,
respectful, mode of address. A native, of whom
I enquired how he would ask anything of a chief,
said, I should go to him and say : —

NkoH ! Nkosi enkulu ! Baba ! ngi te Jeuyo ngi ta
kulmleka, nga i ngi rises. Chief! Great Chief!
Father! I have come to him, coming to make
obeisance. May he be pleased to help me.

I asked if one might say, — I have ootne to yew,
coming to make obeisance; may you be pleased
to help me.

Digitized by VjOOQIC

He replied, no, for if I say I come to you, Ac, I
do not respect him much.

This is but one instance among many in wh*eh
a native has used the optative form of his own
accord. A Christian native suggested it as the
proper mode of prayer. Heathen have afforded
me abundant examples of the form' being in com-
mon use among them, when asking anything in
an earnest, respectful, manner. And Christian
and Heathen, too, both express their approbation
of the form, as used in my translation of the
prayer-book.

From what has gone before, we may lay down
the following rules for its use : —

1. The optative mood must be preceded by words
of reverence, — Nkoei, Baba, $c.

2. Or with these, it should be preceded by, ngi
ya kuleka. or ngi ya kcela, or some such form.

3. It must be properly pronounced.

4. When addressing a chief, it should be in the
third person.

The following are examples, all taken from
natives : —

Eh ! Nkoei ! ngi kulekela ukuba u ngi bone ubu-
lueixi I ami. Ngi kulekela inkomo. Eh ! Chief I I
make obeisance with the object that you may look
upon me as regards my affliction. I make obeisance
with the object of getting a cow.

We have here kulekela, which I have translated,
—make obeisance with an object. The primary
meaning of kuleka, is to make obeisance, and it
comes secondaiily only to mean to ask, or pray.
And perhaps for prayer ukukulekela would be better
than ukukuleka.

It would be rude and r&3ented if a man were to
say to a chief : —

Ngi pe inkomo, Nkoei ; or,
V nga ngi pa inkomo, Nkoei.

But after preliminary salutation (ukubonga) and
obeisance (ukukuleka), any of the following forms
may be used, all of which have been taken from
natives: —

K

- Z*mi nga i ngi pa inkomo— May the chief b*

pleas**!, Ac
JTkosi! nga i ngi pa ink omo Chief, may he be

pleased to, &c.
.tffro** / sju « »#» jm tuftosie— Chief, do or be

pleased to, Ac

The third, being in the second person, is less usual
and less respectful

Nkosi, nga u ngi pa nrnrnntu wokukamba nam*—
Chief ! be plumed to give me a man to ao-
eouipanj me.

Inkoei nga i ngi pa umuntu woknhamba nami> ■
Hay the chief be pleased to give inea man, Ac.

These sentences are translated, as explained by
the natives who used them.

In such sentences nga is emphatic, butrevefentiaL
Different natives have said it implies — fear (ukwe*
sabaj, reverence (ukututa), beseeching (ukuncenga).
Two good Zulu speakers have Englished it by do.

Ntosi, nga u ngi pa inkomo. Chief, do give me a
cow. And this gives a very good idea of its
meaning and force. It is an emphatic, earnest,
but in its proper connection, a reverential and
humble mode of petitioning. It is putting our-
selves in the hands of him of whom we ask ; it is
submitting our will to his.

But we snsll get at the more exact meaning of
it by remembering what this nga is. It is from
the word uku-nga to love, from which we have
um-ngane, a friend ; and isi-ngane t a familiar. And
in such sentences it is properly represented by our
word, please — or. be pleased , —or, would that

tfkosi, nga v ngi pa inkomo. O chief, be pleased
to give. — or please to give,— or would that yon
would give, me a cow.

The following also are proper forms of prayer.

Ngi ya kuleka uknba u ngipe.
Ngi ya kvlekela ukuba u ngi pe.
Ngi ya kuleka, Nkosi, nga u ngi pa.

But in addressing chiefs the natives would use
the 3rd person.
'The following distinction drawn by a native

Digitized by VjOOQIC

between the imperative and opUtive,w«y octodluds
this part of the subject.
"When I say in petitioning. Chief, be pleased

to give me eucb and each, (Nkori, nga u ngi pa
mkutij, I mean by this mode of expression,*-**! can*
not say to you, chief, give me (ngipe), for yon
are not my Bervant; you are not my child; yoa
are not my friend, nor familiar. To these I can
say, give me (ngi pej, for it is not needful for me
to humble myseif to them. I ask of them aa if
they were my own, and as if what I ask for were
mine. But a reckless feLow (ibuda), who puts no
restraint on himself in asking for anything, feels
it unnecessary to use such forms as this— May the
chief be pleased to give me such and such (Nhm
nga i ngi pa ukuti) ; or, chief, be tbou pleased to

S'tve me such and such (Nkosi, nga u ngi pa ukuti).
ut heVill cut the matter abort, and say, " Nkoii,
age pe ukuti. A v> azi na ukuba ngi noele t " O
chief, give me such and such. Do you not know
that I want it ? The chief is not angry at the
man's saying, for he has long known him ss one
that exceeds the bounds of propriety and is incor-
rigible. Such a one is called the chief's reckless
one, (ibuda lenkori). He does not walk in the
path of men, and people only laugh at him. But
a man of character cannot ask like this fellow. If
he do he will not get anything of the chief ; and
may even get into trouble. The chief could say
if he asked in that way, *' So-and-so is snatching
from me. He is taking away what is mine."
Therefore the word, Nkoti, nga v ba nomuta kim%

chief, be pleased to have mercy on me— means,

1 cannot dictate to the chief to be merciful to me,
and make him give up his own will about me. I
must humble myself ; and he must give up his own
will for pity*s sake, which my prayer produces, and
his heart relent ; and not be hardened by having
my hard* prayers heaped upon him.

When we say, Nkosi, nga u ba nomma kimi. we
mean, that the chief can have mercy on me if he

•By har 1 prayers be means prayes uttered in the tanpsnv
ttr*<aead and in other Aiarsspeotful maa&na,

wish; we lay no obligation on him.; wo confess
that everything ia bis; be can do what be wishes
with ns. But it becomes us to be hutnbl*. Wo
have no right to be dictatorial, (a si nago inhlazula)
tor to bo dictatorial is the property of the chief
•lone.

It appears to me perfectly clear that we cannot
teach the natives to louk upon God as they look
upon one of their chiefs. The chief is an object
of dread and of superstitious idolatry of feeling.
He is approached with a cringing servility, which
is incompatible wit h the childlike freedom whioh
characterises the spirit of Christian prayer. At
Che same time, whilst God is our Father, and the
way to approach Him is fully open to all, He is also
the Great King, who is to be reverenced above all.
not with the base servility of a Kafir vkukuUka,
but with the loving reverence of a pardoned and
accepted child. We should not, therefore, in prayer,
adopt any form of words, whioh, in common peti-
tions add re s se d to others, would be regarded as
abrupt, familiar, or disrespectful. We must not
give the native, in' our prayers, an example of
recklessness of speech which characterises the
ttafo among themselves. We should not teach
them to go to God's footstool with the trembling
cringing and hyperbole of lying compliments with
which they approach their chief; or to go round
about in their petitions. The simple curtness of
the prayers add rested to the Atnatongo is a much
better model for us to imitate. But we must not
forget that the Amatongo are not objects of
reverence. They believe in them, not only as
preservers, but as malicious evil-doers ; as watch*
Ing over them for good, or as visiting them with
affliction. And if they imagine they are suffering
from the capricious malice of the dead, they abuse
and scold them just as they would if they were
living. They regard them as belonging to their
Own family, and, therefore, in many ways, in
addressing them, are rude, disrespectful, and
familiar.

. An aged native, not a Christian, though accus-
tomed from childhood to white men, who, when

Digitized by VjOOQIC

the us* of nga disconnected with words of reverence
was pat before hitn, had strongly objected to it,
when tbe sentences after the Lord's prayer were
read to him, entirely approved of them. Bat he
suggested that, instead of saying,—

Nkosi, nga u vula imilomo yeiu — Lord, open
Thou our lips, —

it would be more reverent to say,—

A si vulelwe inkosi imilomo y«f«— Let oar
mouths be opened by the Lord.
And, in the following sentence, —

Dio, nga u kauleza, u si siudise—Q God, make
speed to save us,—

he objected in the strongest and most emphatio
manner, not to nga «, but to kauleza, saying that
it was quite wrong and improper to ask a chief or
a superior to make haste.

Such are some of the difficulties which the
thoughtful, devout missionary will meet with in
the way of learning how to pray aright in Zola*
The question is not to be set aside, as though it
was a matter of indifference; nor is any conclusion
to be reached per solium. There is a constant
corruption of native language snd manners going
on under the influence of the vhite man. The
natives have distinct laws and customs regulating
their conduct towards each other. This applies
to language as well as to conduct. We are our-
selves to a great extent giving up those marks of
mutual respect for superiors which prevail in
European society; and instead there is spring-
ing up a surly indifference which men mistake
for independence* In dealing with natives*
whilst some may make spasmodic attempts to
force them to pay respect, yet as a general rnle
scarcely any effort of any kind, is made to teach
them propex behaviour. They see our indifference
to the rules of common politeness ; they feel that
though at times we may try to esaot from them
some signs of respect, we place really no cheek
upon them; and in a thousand little ways are

81

offending their native sense of proprie ty by
ignorantly or wilfully breaking their customs in
reference to mutual respect. The foolish familiarity
with which they are so often treated ; the utter
neglect of their language which generally prevails;
and the absence of politeness which they notice in
the conduct of many whitemen towards each other,
are acting most injuriously on the native mind.
Now, whatever others may do or leave undone,
the missionary should guard against all such ten*
dencies. He should study the language in its
most minute and most delicate details ; he should
labor to master it, and never rust till he has done
so. lie should also inform himself of their laws
and customs, and mode of thought, and not go
among them and with one word of condemnation
set down the natives as wholly and utterly wrong ;
with one sweep of the pen try to blot out the
customs of generations. Whatever is evil among
them try to correct ; whatever is good try to retain,
try to make the most of, try to make it the start-
ing point to something better with which they are
not yet acquainted. Above all let him teach them
the Gospel of which he is the professed minister
in intelligible and proper language, free from
anglicisms, or an English mode of thought in a
Zulu garb. And in the matter of prayer especially,
let him study the Zulu language and the Zulu
mind, and utterly avoid all approach to familiarity
or irreverence in his prayers to God. The very
thought that it is possible, through the want of
an exact and detailed knowledge of the language
to teach the native irreverence, should put us on
our guard ; and if this discussion lead any one to
be more careful in future it will not have been in
vain.

And, in conclusion, let us remember that it is
not a knowledge of words or even of grammar,
that will alone enable any one to speak correctly;
there are minute idioms which can only be under-
stood by minute investigation, and constant com-
parison of word with word, and sentence with
sentence; and a constant appeal to native authority.

I

Digitized by VjOOQIC

And when one baa mid all that can be aaid am
such a subject, there is still left much unsaid,
which cannot be attained by the written result ef
the investigations of others.

P.S.— Since writing this paper, another form of
prayer was pointed out to me, at the same time,
by probably the best Kafir-speaker in the colony,
and by a native : —

Wanga Utixo anganpata ngofefe—Qod be merci-
ful unto us. (Church of England transla-
tion of Prayer-book, in Itikxota.J

NJcosi va nga u nga ngi aixa — Lord, would thai
Thou woald'st help me.

Inkosi ga nga i nga ngi liw- The Lord, would
that He would help me.

The native, who pointed it out to me in the
Isikxota Prayer-book, said it was an idiom some-
what similar to nga «, that is, it expresses a deep
and earnest longing for something. But he said—
and I have made enquiries of very many natives
since, and they have confirmed it — it is not ad-
dressed to one present, but is said of one absent,
and is the expression of an intense longing, which
either cannot be, or is not expected to be gratified.

The examples given, were these. If a favorite,
faithfai servant has left, and the one who takes
his place is stupid and troublesome, the master
would express his longing fox the return of the old
servant, by saying,—

Wa nga ubani a nga ha lapa— Would that so-
and-so were here.

Or a husband might bemoan the loss of a favorite
wife, by saying,—

Wa nga unobani a nga ngi nco— -Would that so-
and-so could help me.

It will be observed that Wm nga is the Aoritt ef

Digitized by VjOOQIC